Ukrainian Law Blog
Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere
(Move to ...)
Home
Ads Kit
▼
Topics
(Move to ...)
Home
Artificial Intelligence
BB: bitcoin, blockchain
Business Law
Crowdfunding
Cybersecurity
Design Blog
Doing errands in Ukraine
Employment law
EU's Apple tax case
Intellectual Property
IoT - The Internet Of Things
Jenny Holt
KNEU’s Lawyers: Alternative Legal Service Provider...
Legal business/Legal tech
Lucy Adams: essay writing
MH17
Remote Working
Startups
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
Vic Eugene Nicholson ♫♪♫
Rzeczpospolita Polska
Ukraine. Returning own history / Украина. Возвращение своей истории
Ukrainian Art
Алексей Арестович
Commercial representation
Running Errands in Ukraine
Free Legal Advice
About me
▼
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
Opinion analysis: Court rejects constitutional challenge to state law on insurance policies after divorce
This morning the Supreme Court ruled that a Minnesota woman should not receive the money from her ex-husband’s life insurance policy even though she was still his beneficiary when he died in 2011, four years after their divorce. The man’s children had argued that they should get the money because a state law passed in 2002 specifies that when one spouse designates the other as his life-insurance beneficiary, that designation is automatically revoked if the couple divorces. By a vote of 8 to 1, the justices agreed, rejecting the woman’s argument that the 2002 law violates the Constitution’s contracts clause, which bars the states from enacting any laws “impairing the obligation of contracts.”
READ MORE HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
‹
›
Home
View web version
No comments:
Post a Comment